View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Open Research Exeter 1 1 2 University of Exeter’s Institutional Repository, ORE 3 https://ore.exeter.ac.uk/repository/ 4 5 6 7 Article version: POST-PRINT 8 Author(s): Rowden, R. & Rose, P. 9 Article title: A global survey of banteng (Bos javanicus) housing and husbandry 10 Originally published in: Source: Zoo Biology. 10.1002/zoo.21329 11 Link to published article (if available): http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/zoo.21329/full 12 Publisher statement: This is an Author's Original Manuscript of an article submitted for consideration 13 in Zoo Biology, and is available from: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1002/(ISSN)1098-2361 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Usage guidelines 23 Before reusing this item please check the rights under which it has been made available. Some 24 items are restricted to non-commercial use. Please cite the published version where applicable. Further information about usage policies can be found at: 25 http://as.exeter.ac.uk/library/resources/openaccess/ore/orepolicies/ 26 27 Title: A global survey of banteng (Bos javanicus) housing and husbandry 2 28 Authors: L.J. Rowden1 and P.E. Rose2,3 29 Affiliations / contact: 1Paignton Zoo Environmental Park, Totnes Road, Paignton, Devon, UK, 30 TQ4 7EU; 2Sparsholt College Hampshire, Sparsholt, Winchester, Hampshire, UK, SO21 2NF; 31 3Centre for Research in Animal Behaviour, College of Life & Environmental Science, 32 University of Exeter, Exeter, UK, EX4 4QG 33 [email protected] 34 Running head: banteng husbandry survey 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 ABSTRACT 3 50 Banteng (Bos javanicus) are an example of a species of conservation concern without current "best 51 practice” guidance, as they have been the focus of little applied husbandry research. Despite their 52 elevated conservation status, and established, increasing global captive population, zoos do not yet 53 have information on optimal husbandry. To help address this problem, a husbandry survey was 54 distributed to all global holders of banteng. Questions focused on herd demographic structure, exhibit 55 features (including mixed-species exhibition), dietary provision, and behavioral management. 56 Completed surveys from 16 zoos enabled analysis of contemporary practice between institutions. 57 Results indicate differences in enclosure size between zoos, and that herd size is unlikely to predict 58 enclosure size. Herd sizes are smaller than wild examples, and enclosure space (per animal) is 59 significantly smaller than a potential wild range. Banteng are frequently maintained successfully in 60 mixed species exhibits alongside a wide range of other taxa. Nutrient analysis focused on fiber and 61 protein, and although provision of these nutrients appears comparable between zoos, more work is 62 needed on browse and forage intake to determine overall diet suitability. Behavior management shows 63 variation between zoos, with numerous collections providing browse but only a minority undertaking 64 training, and not all providing enrichment. The overall diversity in findings between zoos suggest 65 future research areas that should focus on key aspects of behavioral ecology, such as wild foraging 66 behavior, food plant selection and day/night activity patterns, which may help underpin husbandry 67 guidelines and excellent animal welfare. 68 Keywords: Banteng, Bos javanicus, survey, evidence-based husbandry, zoo animal welfare. 69 70 71 72 73 74 INTRODUCTION 4 75 Developments to the husbandry of captive animals have progressed considerably over the time that 76 wild species have been maintained in captivity [Hosey et al., 2009]. However, in spite of notable 77 advances, gaps still exist in our knowledge of zoo animal management that could detract from 78 maintenance of thriving populations and positive welfare states [Melfi et al., 2005]. Research into 79 wild ecology, behavior and natural history is the best way to fill such gaps [Kleiman, 1985; Melfi, 80 2005; Melfi, 2009]. Species that receive less attention in the research field of “evidence-based 81 husbandry” are those that could be managed incorrectly. A potential disparity between the number of 82 animals of a particular species held in zoos and the frequency of research interest on these species is 83 noted by several authors [Anderson et al., 2008; Melfi, 2009]. The focus of this paper, an ungulate 84 species, is part of one such mammalian group that can receive less research attention when compared 85 to other zoo mammals [Rose and Robert, 2013]. 86 One approach that characterizes the attempt to enhance zoo animal welfare via achievement of 87 optimal husbandry standards is the development of species-specific guidelines for zoo animals 88 [Mellen, 1994; Rose and Roffe, 2013]. Such guidelines aim to identify the most appropriate and most 89 suitable management approaches for particular taxa [Fletchall et al., 1995; Galama et al., 2002]; they 90 generally contain standardized information on ecology as well as a description of how biological and 91 behavioral needs of a species can be best met in captivity [Barber et al., 2010]. Husbandry guidelines 92 are increasingly being developed to a species-specific level but again, there are gaps in the availability 93 of these guidelines as well as in the amount of empirical evidence that they contain. A new move 94 towards “Best Practice Guidelines” [EAZA, 2015] aims to showcase the most important aspects of 95 husbandry that have been shown to promote highest welfare standards for a particular species. 96 Important natural history information, and details on wild behavioral ecology, evolutionary 97 adaptations and life history strategy should be collected on species that are housed in zoos and used to 98 formulate such best practice guidance. 99 100 Banteng biology 5 101 The banteng (Bos javanicus) is a wild bovid from South-East Asia, currently classified as 102 “Endangered” by the IUCN Red List [Timmins et al. 2008]. Recent population estimates range 103 between 5000 and 8000 individuals, distributed between small and isolated populations [Groves et al., 104 2011]. Considering this level of threat, it is perhaps not surprising that banteng are maintained in 105 captivity. Breeding is coordinated by an EEP (European Endangered Species Programme) in 106 European Associations of Zoos and Aquaria (EAZA), and within AZA (Association of Zoos and 107 Aquariums) banteng are a candidate species for a potential future SSP (Species Survival Plan). 108 Research into the wild demographics of banteng populations reveal that an average herd typically 109 comprises of between eight and 12 animals with a core consisting of adult females and their 110 dependent offspring [Gardener et al., 2014; Groves et al., 2011]. A single mature male will typically 111 form loose associations with a herd, but outside of this arrangement can be solitary or join a bachelor 112 group [Gardener et al., 2014]. Average longevity is suggested around 20 years, with the oldest known 113 captive banteng reaching 27 years [Groves et al., 2011]. 114 Information on wild ecology and habitat selection is limited. Literature does suggest that banteng are 115 generalists but that they may potentially favor areas of dense forest incorporating open patches of 116 grassland [Gardener et al., 2014; Groves et al., 2011]. Sumardja and Kartawinata [1977] indicate a 117 grazing preference for several genera of grasses, with other research highlighting opportunistic 118 foraging on bamboo and palm, as well as on the saplings of several tree species [Groves et al., 2011]. 119 Such information supports the characterization of banteng as an intermediate feeder [Hofmann, 1973; 120 Hofmann and Stewart, 1972]. A useful review of foraging ecology and food plant selection is 121 provided by Timmins et al. [2008], which may be helpful to those attempting to formulate naturalistic 122 captive diets. 123 Attempts to fully meet the challenges of conserving banteng and maintaining them appropriately in 124 captivity may be hindered by the lack of available best-practice guidelines. With a substantial global 125 population of 291 animals across 31 Zoological Information Management System (ZIMS) registered 126 zoos (as of February 2016) there could be substantial variation in what is considered to be the most 127 appropriate husbandry standard for this species. The most relevant document currently available takes 6 128 the form of a set of guidelines produced by the AZA Bison, Buffalo and Cattle advisory group 129 [Joseph 2004]. This document focusses solely upon existing trends in wild cattle management from 130 the AZA region and does not include a significant amount of banteng-specific detail; this lack of 131 specificity and reference only to institutions in a particular area has the potential to limit usefulness to 132 maintaining banteng on a global scale. Within the AZA Wild Cattle and Camelid TAG, banteng have 133 been identified as a priority species and a “Call to Action” has been put out to encourage new holders 134 to become involved with this species, and to support more work into informed husbandry and 135 management practice [B. Huffman, personal communication]. As such, it would appear to be the 136 perfect time to bring together what information is currently known about banteng housing and 137 husbandry, to determine any common trends that may be working well. 138 Aims and Objectives 139 The combined factors of the banteng’s threat category, and its economic and ecological importance 140 within its range states [Nguyen 2009; Solti et al. 2000; Talib et al. 2003], and a push to increase 141 support for banteng exhibition within zoos, emphasize why this species should be considered a 142 species worthy of relevant research in zoological institutions. This paper aims to collate information 143 on current practices for the maintenance of banteng in captive institutions globally, and to add 144 knowledge to an area of zoo husbandry lacking in evidence-based information.